Well, Ow's Moment Has Been And Gone Again...

[cdowis]

Like Bruce McConkie did for the black persons.

 

CFR.  As I remember, he said it was a temporary situation but please give us the quote.

Edited April 6, 2014 by cdowis

[cdowis]

Satan will quote scripture to justify attacking the church.  I am not shy to point out that "keep knocking" is a misuse of that scripture to justify rebellion against the church.

 

Canard, I consider your post as a compliment.  It is indeed typical for me to defend the church against sophistry by justifying disobedience and rebellion.

Edited April 6, 2014 by cdowis

[Calm]

Hi Cal, do you know of any revelation to institute the ban on either black men or any woman having priesthood.

I can understand why it wouldn't be done without but was it also started without?

Nope, would be nice to have one to point to for the latter (rather glad actually we don't for the former) just to help those who are troubled by this, but it seems to me the only revelation is on of absence as in women could have been mentioned but weren't.

[Calm]

From awyatt's blog:

"A few Street Preachers were also mingling with the crowd, as were some police. The Street Preachers left before the event began, as Ordain Women had apparently reserved City Creek Park for the event and, thus, the Street Preachers could not be there. They moved down the hill to the park entrance and did their preaching to those coming into the park."

Given the reaction of OW to the Church's request they not protest on Temple Square, this made me laugh.

Ps: was the boy found?

PPS: so most press respected the Church's instruction?

PPPS: was OW mixed in with regular attendees in the standby line or did they form a separate one?

Edited April 6, 2014 by calmoriah

[wenglund]

h

 

Why do we give so much attention to this group?  Why am I even linking this article?  What is the fascination?

...and yet we continue to watch.  Maybe that is the goal after all.

 

Uncommon pride and hubris can be real attention grabbers.

 

Thanks, -Wade Englund-

Edited April 6, 2014 by wenglund

[Disciple?]

They are trending on Yahoo search right now -- #7.

[awyatt]

Given the reaction of OW to the Church's request they not protest on Temple Square, this made me laugh.

 

It was a bit ironic, no?

 

 

Ps: was the boy found?

 

I assume so; I didn't hear otherwise.

 

 

PPS: so most press respected the Church's instruction?

 

Yes, that is true.

 

 

PPPS: was OW mixed in with regular attendees in the standby line or did they form a separate one?

 

Mixed into regular. However, they came mostly as a group.

 

If I had an IT bent (which I do), I would compare the arrival of the OW group at the standby line to a DoS (denial of service) attack where so much false traffic arrives at a website that the needs of legitimate users cannot be serviced.

 

Of course, if I wrote about *that* in a blog post, I'd probably be castigated more than I was for comparing the OW leaders' tactics to those of The Doors.

 

-Allen

Edited April 6, 2014 by awyatt

[Thinking]

I don't think that many women are ready for the priesthood.

 

Or maybe, just maybe, women are so far superior to men that giving the men the priesthood raises them closer to the level that the women are at already.

 

On my mission there was a sister whose nickname was the apostle. Although officially she was never more than senior companion, her opinions carried weight. We used to say that the reason women didn't get the priesthood is because they didn't need it - they had enough power without it.

 

All joking aside, your statement is condescending toward women. Whatever reasons there are for not allowing women to hold the priesthood, I'm confident that not being ready is not one of them.

[Calm]

If I had an IT bent (which I do), I would compare the arrival of the OW group at the standby line to a DoS (denial of service) attack where so much false traffic arrives at a website that the needs of legitimate users cannot be serviced.

 

Of course, if I wrote about *that* in a blog post, I'd probably be castigated more than I was for comparing the OW leaders' tactics to those of The Doors.

 

-Allen

I had admired them last time for choosing to make a separate line so that they would not interfere with the usual attendees. Was I wrong about that? Do you know if they did the samelat year as this year and if they changed it, did they say why that you know of?

[Teancum]

CFR.  As I remember, he said it was a temporary situation but please give us the quote.

  Read his book and other comments.  He said not till the millennium.   You can look it up if you want to.

[teddyaware]

Or maybe, just maybe, women are so far superior to men that giving the men the priesthood raises them closer to the level that the women are at already.

 

On my mission there was a sister whose nickname was the apostle. Although officially she was never more than senior companion, her opinions carried weight. We used to say that the reason women didn't get the priesthood is because they didn't need it - they had enough power without it.

 

All joking aside, your statement is condescending toward women. Whatever reasons there are for not allowing women to hold the priesthood, I'm confident that not being ready is not one of them.

I truly believe that if women were given the priesthood, men would become little more than drones. Men were given the priesthood so as to make things even between men and women. The divine roll of motherhood is so sacred, spiritually empowering and ennobling that men need the priesthood in order for there to be an even distribution of spiritual labor and responsibility between the sexes within the kingdom of God. The Lord knows what He's doing. But unfortunately some LDS women are overly influenced by worldly ideologies and secular cultural trends to the point that these influences have become a virtual part of their religion.

Edited April 7, 2014 by teddyaware

[awyatt]

I had admired them last time for choosing to make a separate line so that they would not interfere with the usual attendees. Was I wrong about that? Do you know if they did the samelat year as this year and if they changed it, did they say why that you know of?

 

Not sure. All I know is this time -- they were in the marked, regular standby line.

 

-Allen

[cdowis]

  Read his book and other comments.  He said not till the millennium.   You can look it up if you want to.

 

It appears that you did not read his statement before posting your comment.

 

So the situation for the blacks, which was temporary, is NOT the same as priesthood for the sisters.  I suggest that you re-read your post and be more careful next time.

[cdowis]

  Read his book and other comments.  He said not till the millennium.   You can look it up if you want to.

 

Then the situation for the sisters is NOT the same as for blacks.  Why did you post "Like Bruce McConkie did for the black persons."

May I suggest that you be more careful in your posts if you want to have credibility in this forum.  

 

There was no indication at all that the situation for the sisters is temporary.

Edited April 7, 2014 by cdowis

[smac97]

From awyatt's blog:

"A few Street Preachers were also mingling with the crowd, as were some police. The Street Preachers left before the event began, as Ordain Women had apparently reserved City Creek Park for the event and, thus, the Street Preachers could not be there. They moved down the hill to the park entrance and did their preaching to those coming into the park."

Given the reaction of OW to the Church's request they not protest on Temple Square, this made me laugh.

Yes. "Compliance with the law for thee and thine, but not for me and mine" seems to have been the MO of the OW group yesterday.

PPS: so most press respected the Church's instruction?

As far as I could tell, yes. I was outside on Temple Square from about 6:10 to about 7:25.

PPPS: was OW mixed in with regular attendees in the standby line or did they form a separate one?

I'm not sure. I exited the Tabernacle around 6:10 because everyone already inside (all men, all hoping for standby tickets) had just been told that the Conference Center was full. It appeared that the line outside was comprised exclusively of the protesters.

Thanks,

-Smac

[juliann]

 

The Trib's write-up (http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/news/57778960-78/women-church-square-ordain.html.csp?page=2) seems to provide the most detail as to what happened, and what happened was . . . defiance and a trespass:

LDS officials initially had asked Ordain Women not to enter Temple Square this conference, but by last week apparently had accepted that the group intended to enter.

On Saturday, the women were met at the gate by a church representative, who asked them to go to the public protest area outside the square, Kelly said. Instead, they walked onto the square, where they formed a line circling the Tabernacle and, one by one, asked a church spokeswoman for tickets to the priesthood session. Each woman was rejected.

I have only seen declarations that they were not asked to leave.  They obviously were asked to leave.

[smac97]

I have only seen declarations that they were not asked to leave.  They obviously were asked to leave.

 

Yeah, Kate Kelly's spin on this was less than impressive: 

 

On Saturday, the women were met at the gate by a church representative, who asked them to go to the public protest area outside the square, Kelly said. Instead, they walked onto the square, where they formed a line circling the Tabernacle and, one by one, asked a church spokeswoman for tickets to the priesthood session. Each woman was rejected.

 

Ordain Women had hired police officers as escorts Saturday night.

 

Kelly called the church’s statement after the event "unnecessarily harsh." She said once the women were inside the square, they were not asked to leave.

 

 

Well, let's see: She was told weeks in advance that they could not protest on Temple Square, but her group publicly declared their intention to defy the Church and to go on to Temple Square anyway.  Then they show up yesterday and are met at the gate and asked not to enter.  They again defy the Church and enter, thus committing a trespass.

 

And yet, somehow, we are expected to believe that a third request from the Church, asking them to stop trespassing, would have been honored by Kate Kelly and her cohorts?

 

Kate Kelly continues to unimpress.

 

-Smac

[awyatt]

From awyatt's blog:

"A few Street Preachers were also mingling with the crowd, as were some police. The Street Preachers left before the event began, as Ordain Women had apparently reserved City Creek Park for the event and, thus, the Street Preachers could not be there. They moved down the hill to the park entrance and did their preaching to those coming into the park."

Given the reaction of OW to the Church's request they not protest on Temple Square, this made me laugh.

 

I actually decided to write a blog post about this ironic double standard and another double standard I noted:

 

   Worthwhile Causes and Double Standards

 

-Allen

[Calm]

Good points, Allen.

[Scott Lloyd]

It was a bit ironic, no?

 

 

 

I assume so; I didn't hear otherwise.

 

 

 

Yes, that is true.

 

 

 

Mixed into regular. However, they came mostly as a group.

 

If I had an IT bent (which I do), I would compare the arrival of the OW group at the standby line to a DoS (denial of service) attack where so much false traffic arrives at a website that the needs of legitimate users cannot be serviced.

 

Of course, if I wrote about *that* in a blog post, I'd probably be castigated more than I was for comparing the OW leaders' tactics to those of The Doors.

 

-Allen

Just now read your Doors blog post, and you are spot on with both this and that comparison.

[mormonnewb]

My daughter just told me that she would leave the church if women were ordained. I am sure that there are many like her. I don't think that many women are ready for the priesthood. This would not be a matter of choice. It would be something that every female who comes of age would be expected to have. And some do not wish to make that choice. What to do with the women who refused the priesthood now? Send them to a relief society meeting while those that accept will join the men in priesthood?

 

Thus, the issue. Women are not ready for the priesthood.

 

Ladies,

 

This is the perfect illustration is to why you will NEVER have anything even close to equality in this Church, unless you have the priesthood.  Because, so long as not one of you has the authority of even a 12-year-old BOY, we men will be forced to come up with reasons why you don't.

 

Isn't this what happened with blacks and the priesthood?  We had a policy that restricted the priesthood and then we started inventing reasons for that ban and not ONE of them was positive for our image of blacks.  Blacks were cursed, fence sitters, lacked the buoyancy, etc.  Actually, that last one was used as a reason why blacks didn't hold leadership positions in major league baseball, but you get my point.

 

This is the reason that separate but equal has NEVER been equal.  Because we must create reasons to justify the separation and those reasons will only work to the disadvantage of the excluded group.  How could it be otherwise?

[MorningStar]

Ladies,

 

This is the perfect illustration is to why you will NEVER have anything even close to equality in this Church, unless you have the priesthood.  Because, so long as not one of you has the authority of even a 12-year-old BOY, we men will be forced to come up with reasons why you don't.

 

Isn't this what happened with blacks and the priesthood?  We had a policy that restricted the priesthood and then we started inventing reasons for that ban and not ONE of them was positive for our image of blacks.  Blacks were cursed, fence sitters, lacked the buoyancy, etc.  Actually, that last one was used as a reason why blacks didn't hold leadership positions in major league baseball, but you get my point.

 

This is the reason that separate but equal has NEVER been equal.  Because we must create reasons to justify the separation and those reasons will only work to the disadvantage of the excluded group.  How could it be otherwise?

I've never thought of a 12-year-old boy being higher ranking than me.  The "authority" is about service and I have plenty of opportunities to serve.  I don't feel unequal.

[ERayR]

Ladies,

 

This is the perfect illustration is to why you will NEVER have anything even close to equality in this Church, unless you have the priesthood.  Because, so long as not one of you has the authority of even a 12-year-old BOY, we men will be forced to come up with reasons why you don't.

 

Isn't this what happened with blacks and the priesthood?  We had a policy that restricted the priesthood and then we started inventing reasons for that ban and not ONE of them was positive for our image of blacks.  Blacks were cursed, fence sitters, lacked the buoyancy, etc.  Actually, that last one was used as a reason why blacks didn't hold leadership positions in major league baseball, but you get my point.

 

This is the reason that separate but equal has NEVER been equal.  Because we must create reasons to justify the separation and those reasons will only work to the disadvantage of the excluded group.  How could it be otherwise?

 

IMNSHO you have an incorrect view.  Neither male or female can be fully glorified in God in their separate roles.  To receive the ultimate exultation they must walk before God, hand in hand, in unity, each fulfilling their separate roles.  Individually we can not be complete.  If we do not embrace and fulfill our separate roles we can not be complete when united. 

[ERayR]

I've never thought of a 12-year-old boy being higher ranking than me.  The "authority" is about service and I have plenty of opportunities to serve.  I don't feel unequal.

 

IMNSHO those who chaff in their position look on it as a means of self aggrandizement instead of as a means to serve.

[JLHPROF]

I've never thought of a 12-year-old boy being higher ranking than me.  The "authority" is about service and I have plenty of opportunities to serve.  I don't feel unequal.

 

That's because (assuming you're endowed) a 12 year old Deacon DOESN'T rank higher.  You've been endowed with power well beyond the Aaronic priesthood.